I would really like to see his arguments taken on, however. liberals) use this method to create policy. What, in his earlier work Sowell called "the constrained vs the unconstrained vision," and what Steven Pinker renamed "the tragic vs the Utopian vision, in this book Sowell discusses as "the tragic vision vs the vision of the anointed." Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders. The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation As a Basis for Social Policy
He often writes from an economically laissez-faire perspective. I recommend it to all those wanting, or merely willing, to question the established zeitgeist. I would love to hear a counter-argument from the "anointed" (as he calls those who assume their inherent moral and intellectual superiority and offer it in place of reasoning or empirical evidence). In this classic gem, Sowell catalogs the efforts of the anointed, or rather cultural elites who believe they know better than the rest of us, to make society more just for those who they perceive to be victims. But his explanation of trade offs anI have read Sowell before- his book Race and Culture and some of his editorials.
In this outstanding book, he exposes liberals for what they believe themselves to be - "the annointed".
“The vision of the anointed is one in which ills as poverty, irresponsible sex, and crime derive primarily from ‘society,’ rather than from individual choices and behavior. He fires a volley of logic and research across the bow of the ship of self-righteous elitism in effort to warn them of the approaching icebergs.
DIVSowell presents a devastating critique of the mind-set behind the failed social policies of the past thirty years. Essentially, his thesis is that policy makers have far too often replaced rational analysis of outcomes with wishful and willful assertions that run counter to the facts of the case. The tragic vision favors the provision of practical incentives rather than attempts at the reform of dispositions. It's wonderful for debunking a plethora of doomsday economic and social myths, and it provides a thorough outline of the type of specious arguments used to avoid addressing specific objections to specific policies and programs. They close their eyes to reality and logic and argue with blind emotion, trying to frame rational people as unfeeling even as they rob them to fund their wasteful and destructive programs.So very true; enumerates so many of the distractions I have run up against talking with liberals. He makes an argument for the validity of his thesis by illustrating how the "Vision of the Anointed" can consistently explain the Left's oft-irrational actions and arguments. The subtitle, "Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy," gets closer to the heart of it. But I read this leading up to the election, so that might explain a lot of my response to the book.
Nevertheless, I proceed.In attempting to write about this book, I have become aware of how well Sowell can discuss complex topics so succinctly and with such ease, and how I cannot. It has to be understood as a sequel volume to Sowell's 1987 book, "A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles." In 2002 he was awarded the National Humanities Medal for prolific scholarsThomas Sowell is an American economist, social commentator, and author of dozens of books. If you tire of the lightweight stuff from the talking heads like a Hannity, a Rush, or an O'Reilly, then read Sowell's There is much that one could like here. Sowell analyzes the major substitutes. I assume he would simply be dismissed as another heartless uninformed know-nothing. And that is to say nothing of the times my arguments have been called "simplistic" and yet no reason is ever given for why they are actually wrong. Yet this evidence convinces few of the experimenters that something could be structurally wrong with their theories.As a free-market economist, Sowell is interested in identifying the incentives that intelligent people have for indulging and reproducing a vision that has lost its connection with reality. He often writes from an economically laissez-faire perspective. This book review conservatives) can do no wrong.
In the Tragic Vision, humans are fundamentally flawed and an elite cannot monopolize enough information to make decisions on behalf of society.Thomas Sowell does an excellent job of showcasing the many errors of politicians in central planning and forcing their vision of economics and morals on society through law. The mountainous evidence for the failure of modern-liberal experiments would startle any disinterested observer.